HomeMy WebLinkAbout477_Amend Part 17 Ch 4_Regulating Cable TelevisionTULSA COUNTY CLERK - JOAN HASTINGS RCPT 23415 04/04/94 14:27:34
DOC # 94038657 FEE 0.00 PGS 19 B/P 5610/2466 -2484
CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
Ordinance No. 477
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART 17, UTILITIES, OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, BY ENACTING
A NEW CHAPTER 4, SECTIONS 1000 THROUGH 1006, RELATED TO
REGULATION OF BASIC CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE RATES WITHIN
THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF OWASSO; DEFINING
CERTAIN TERMS; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE INITIAL REVIEW OF BASIC CABLE SERVICE RATES;
ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE
OPERATORS TO REQUEST AN INCREASE IN BASIC CABLE
TELEVISION SERVICE RATES; PROVIDING CERTAIN PROTECTIONS
FOR PROPRIETARY INFORMATION PRODUCED BY A CABLE
TELEVISION OPERATOR TO THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR AUTOMATIC
ADJUSTMENTS TO BASIC CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE RATES, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OWASSO,
OKLAHOMA, THAT:
Section 1. That Part 17, Chapter 4, of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, be and the-same is hereby enacted
to read as follows:
SECTION 1000. SHORT TITLE
This Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Owasso"
Basic Cable Television Service Rate Regulation Ordinance."
SECTION 1001. DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following terms,
phrases, words and their derivations shall have the meaning given
herein. When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the
present tense include the future tense, words in plural include the
singular and words in the singular include the plural. The word
"shall" is always mandatory and not directory.
A. Basic Cable Service Rates. Monthly charges for a
subscription to the Basic Cable Service Tier, including charges for
associated equipment.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipments costs, see 47 CFR §76.933.
CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:23
5610 2467
B. Basic Cable Service Tier. Any category of separately
available cable service provided by a Cable Operator to which
subscription is required for access to any other tier of service
and which includes the retransmission of local television broadcast
signals, any public, educational and governmental programming and
any additional video programming signals added by a Cable Operator.
Cross References
Definitions, --basic cable service ", see 47 USC, §522(3).
Definitions, "service tier'-, see 47 USC, §522(16).
Regulation of Rates, Establishment of Basic Service Tier Rate Regulation, Components of basic
service tier subject to rate regulation, minimum contents, see 47 USC, §543(b)(7)(A).
Definitions, "basic service ", see 47 CFR §76.901(x).
Composition of basic tier, see 47 CFR §76.920.
C. Benchmark. The per Channel rate of charge for cable
television service and associated equipment which the FCC has
determined to be reasonable.
Cross References
Regulation of Rates, Establishment of Basic Service Tier Rate Regulation, Commission
obligation to subscribers to ensure reasonable rates, see 47 USC, §543(b)(1).
D. Cable Act. The Communications Act of 1934, as amended by
the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act
(Public Law No. 102 -385, 1992) and as the same may hereafter be
amended.
E. Cable Operator. Any person or group of persons:
1. Who provides cable television service over a cable system
and directly, or through one or more affiliates, owns a significant
interest in such a cable system; or
2. Who otherwise controls or is responsible for, through any
arrangement, the management and operation of such a cable
television system.
Cross References
Definitions, "cable operator ", see 47 USC, §522(5).
2 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2468
F. Channel. A portion of the electromagnetic frequency
spectrum which is used as a unit of cable television service
identified and selected by a number or similar designation.
Cross References
Definitions, "cable channel" or "channel ", see 47 USC, §522(4).
G. City. The City of Owasso, Oklahoma, a municipal
corporation in its present incorporated form or in any other
reorganized or changed form.
H. Cost -of- Service Showing. A filing in which a Cable
Operator attempts to show that the Benchmark rate or the Price Cap
is not sufficient to allow the Cable Operator to fully recover the
costs of providing the Basic Cable Service Tier and to continue to
attract capital.
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, pursuant to a cost of service proceeding, see 47 CFR §76.922(b)(1)(i).
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, subsequent permitted
per channel charge, pursuant to a cost of service showing, see 47 CFR §76.922(c)(1).
Cost accounting and cost allocation requirements, applicable for cost -of- service showings, see
47 CFR §76.924.
I. Council. The City Council of the City or any body
constituting in the future the legislative body of the City.
J. FCC. The Federal Communications Commission or its
successor.
K. Initial Basic Cable Service Rates. The rates that a
Cable Operator is charging for the Basic Cable Service Tier,
including charges for associated equipment, at the time the City
notifies the Cable Operator of the City's qualification and intent
to regulate Basic Cable Service Rates.
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services Tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, see 47 CFR §76.922(b).
L. Person. An individual, corporation, partnership,
association, joint stock company, trust corporation or governmental
entity.
M. Price Cap. The ceiling set by the FCC on future
increases in Basic Cable Service Rates regulated by the City, based
on a formula using the Gross National Product fixed weight price
index, reflecting general increases in the cost of doing business
and changes in overall inflation.
Cross References
3 CAOLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2469
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, price cap requirements, see 47 CFR §76.922(d).
N. Reasonable Rate Standard. Any per Channel rate that is
at, or below, the Benchmark or Price Cap level.
Cross References
Regulation of Rates, Establishment of Basic Service Tier Rate Regulation, Commission
obligation to subscribers to ensure reasonable rates, see 47 USC, §543(b).
A. Notice. Upon the effective date of the Ordinance
adopting this Chapter and certification of the City by the FCC to
regulate Basic Cable Service Rates, the City shall immediately
notify any Cable Operator in the City, by certified mail, return
receipt requested, that the City intends to regulate Basic Cable
Service Rates as authorized by the Cable Act.
Cross References
Franchising authority certification, effective date provisions, see 47 CFR §76.910 (e).
B. Cable Operator response. Within thirty (30) days of
receiving notice from the City a Cable Operator shall file with the
City its current Basic Cable Service Rates and any supporting
material concerning the reasonableness of those rates.
Cross References
Initiation of review of basic cable service and equipment rates, filing of rates by cable
operator, see 47 CFR §76.930.
C. Expedited determination and public hearing.
1. If the City Council is able to expeditiously determine
that the Cable Operator's Basic Cable Service Rates are within the
FCC's Reasonable Rate Standard, as determined by the applicable
Benchmark, the City Council shall:
a. Hold a public hearing at which interested persons may
express their views; and
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
b. Act to approve the Basic Cable Service Rates within
thirty (30) days from the date the Cable Operator filed its
Basic Cable Service Rates with the City.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
4 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2470
after submission un Less tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
2. If the City Council takes no action within thirty (30)
days from the date the Cable Operator filed its Basic Cable Service
Rates with the City, the proposed rates shall continue in effect.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
C. Extended review period.
1. If the City Council is unable to determine whether the
Cable Operator's Basic Cable Service Rates are within the FCC's
Reasonable Rate Standard based on the material before it, or if the
Cable Operator submits a Cost -of- Service Showing, the City Council
shall, within thirty (30) days from the date the Cable Operator
filed its Basic Cable Service Rates with the City and by adoption
of a formal resolution, invoke the following additional periods of
time, as applicable, to make a final determination:
5 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2471
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
a. Ninety (90) days, if the City Council needs more time to
ensure that a rate is within the FCC's Reasonable Rate
Standard; or
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates tolled for 90
days after submission if not involving a cost -of- service showing, see 47 CFR
§76.933(b)(1).
b. One hundred -fifty (150) days, if the Cable Operator has
submitted a Cost -of- Service Showing seeking to justify a rate
above the applicable Benchmark.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates toLLed for 150
days after submission if involving a cost -of- service showing, see 47 CFR
§76.933(b)(2).
2. If the City Council has not made a decision within the
ninety (90) or one hundred -fifty (150) day period, the City Council
shall issue a brief written order at the end of the period
requesting the Cable Operator to keep accurate account of all
amounts received by reason of the proposed rate and on whose behalf
the amounts are paid.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 90 or
150 days after submission if no action within additional time periods, see 47 CFR
§76.933(c).
E. Public hearing. During the extended review period and
before taking action on the proposed rate, the City Council shall
hold at least one public hearing at which interested persons may
express their views and record objections.
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
F. Objections. An interested person who wishes to make an
objection to the proposed Initial Basic Cable Service Rate may
request the Council Secretary record the objection during the
public hearing or may submit the objection in writing anytime
before the decision resolution is adopted. In order for an
objection to be made part of the record, the objector shall provide
the Council Secretary with the objector's name and address.
6 CARLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2472
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
Commission review of franchising authority decisions on rates for the basic service tier and
associated equipment, any participant at the franchising authority level in a rate
making proceeding may file an appeal, see 47 CFR §76.944(b).
G. Benchmark analysis. If a Cable Operator submits its
current Basic Cable Service Rate schedule as being in compliance
with the FCC's Reasonable Rate Standard, the City Council shall
review the rates using the Benchmark analysis, in accordance with
the standard form authorized by the FCC. Based on the City
Council's findings, the Initial Basic Cable Service Rates shall be
established as follows:
1. If the current Basic Cable Service Rates are equal to or
below the Benchmark, those rates shall become the Initial Basic
Cable Service Rates and the Cable Operator's rates shall be capped
at that level.
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, see 47 CFR §76.922(b)(1)(ii)(A).
2. If the current Basic Cable Service Rates exceed the
Benchmark, the rates shall be the greater of the Cable Operator's
per Channel rate on September 30, 1992, reduced by ten percent
(10 %), or the applicable Benchmark, adjusted for inflation and any
change in the number of Channels occurring between September 30,
1992 and the initial date of regulation.
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, see 47 CFR §76.922(b)(1)(ii)(B).
3. If the current Basic Cable Service Rates exceed the
Benchmark, but the Cable Operator's per Channel rate was below the
Benchmark on September 30, 1992, the Initial Basic Cable Service
Rate shall be the Benchmark, adjusted for inflation.
CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2473
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, see 47 CFR §76.922(b)(1)(ii)(C).
H. Cost -of- Service Showings. If a Cable Operator does not
wish to reduce the rates to the permitted level, the Cable Operator
shall have the opportunity to submit a Cost -of- Service Showing in
an attempt to justify a Initial Basic Cable Service Rates above the
FCC's Reasonable Rate Standard. The City Council shall review a
Cost -of- Service submission pursuant to FCC standards for review.
The City Council may approve Initial Basic Cable Service Rates
above the Benchmark if the Cable Operator makes the necessary
showing; however, a Cost -of- Service determination resulting in
rates below the Benchmark or below the Cable Operator's September
30, 1992 rates minus ten (10 %) percent, shall prescribe the Cable
Operator's new rates.
Cross References
Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers, initial permitted per
channel charge, see 47 CFR §76.922(b)(i).
Rate prescription, franchising authority to order, see 47 CFR §76.941.
I. Decision.
1. By formal resolution. After completion of its review of
the Cable Operator's proposed rates, the City Council shall adopt
its decision by formal resolution. The decision shall include one
of the following:
Cross References
Written decision, when a franchising authority must issue, see 47 CFR §76.936.
a. If the proposal is within the FCC's Reasonable Rate
Standard or is justified by a Cost -of- Service analysis, the
City Council shall approve the Initial Basic Cable Service
Rates proposed by the Cable Operator; or
b. If the proposal is not within the FCC's Reasonable Rate
Standard and the Cost -of- Service analysis, if any, does not
justify the proposed rates, the City Council shall establish
Initial Basic Cable Service Rates that are within the FCC's
Reasonable Rate Standard or that are justified by a
Cost -of- Service analysis.
CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2474
Cross References
Rate prescription, franchising authority to order, see 47 CFR §76.941.
2. Rollbacks and refunds. If the City Council determines
that the Initial Basic Cable Service Rates, as submitted, exceed
the Reasonable Rate Standard or that the Cable Operator's
Cost -of- Service Showing justifies lower rates, the City Council may
order the rates reduced in accordance with subsection G. or H.
above, as applicable. In addition, the City Council may order the
Cable Operator to pay to subscribers refunds of the excessive
portion of the rates, with interest (computed at applicable rates
published by the Internal Revenue Service for tax refunds and
additional tax payments), retroactive to September 1, 1993. The
method for paying any refund and the interest rate shall be in
accordance with FCC regulations as directed in the City Council's
decision resolution.
Cross References
Refunds, if previously paid rates determined to be excessive, see 47 CFR §76.942.
3. Statement of reasons for decision and public notice. If
rates proposed by a Cable Operator are disapproved in whole or in
part, or if there were objections made by other parties to the
proposed rates, the resolution shall state the reasons for the
decision and the City Council shall give public notice of its
decision by publication of the Council's resolution, once, in a
newspaper of general circulation within the corporate limits of the
City.
Cross References
Written decision, public notice of any written decision required, see 47 CFR §76.936.
J. Appeal. The City Council's decision concerning rates for
the Basic Cable Service Tier or associated equipment, may be
appealed to the FCC in accordance with applicable federal
regulations.
Cross References
Commission review of franchising authority decisions on rates for the basic service tier and
associated equipment, any participant at the franchising authority Level in a rate
making proceeding may file an appeal, see 47 CFR §76.944.
CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2475
SECTION 1003. REVIEW OF REQUEST FOR INCREASE IN BASIC CABLE
SERVICE RATES
A. Notice. A Cable Operator in the City who wishes to
increase the rates for the Basic Cable Service Tier or associated
equipment shall file a request with the City and notify all
subscribers at least thirty (30) days before the Cable Operator
desires the increase to take effect. This notice may not be given
more often than annually and not until at least one year after the
determination of the Initial Basic Cable Service Rates.
Cross References
Advance written notification to customers of any changes in rates, programming services or
channel position, see 47 CFR §76309(c)(3)(i)(B).
Notification of proposed rate increases, written notice to subscribers, see 47 CFR §76.932.
Advance written notification of rate increases to franchising authority, see 47 CFR §76.964.
B. Expedited determination and public hearing.
1. If the City Council is able to expeditiously determine
that the Cable Operator's rate increase request for basic cable
service is within the FCC's Reasonable Rate Standard, as determined
by the applicable Price Cap, the City Council shall:
a. Hold a public hearing at which interested persons may
express their views; and
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
b. Act to approve the rate increase within thirty (30) days
from the date the Cable Operator filed its request with the
City.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
2. If the City Council takes no action within thirty (30)
days from the date the Cable Operator filed its request with the
City, the proposed rates shall go into effect.
10 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2476
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
C. Extended review period.
1. If the City Council is unable to determine whether the
rate increase is within the FCC's Reasonable Rate Standard based on
the material before it, or if the Cable Operator submits a
Cost -of- Service Showing, the City Council shall, by adoption of a
formal resolution, invoke the following additional periods of time,
as applicable, to make a final determination:
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
a. Ninety (90) days, if the City Council needs more time to
ensure that the requested increase is within the FCC's
Reasonable Rate Standard as determined by the applicable Price
Cap; and
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates tolled for 90
days after submission if not involving a cost -of- service showing, see 47 CFR
§76.933(b)(1).
b. One hundred -fifty (150) days, if the Cable Operator has
submitted a Cost -of- Service Showing seeking to justify a rate
increase above the applicable Price Cap.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates tolled for 150
days after submission if involving a cost -of- service showing, see 47 CFR
§76.933(b)(2).
2. A proposed rate increase shall be tolled during any
extended review period.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 30 days
after submission unless tolled, see 47 CFR §76.933(a).
3. If the City Council has not made a decision within the
ninety (90) or one hundred -fifty (150) day period, the City Council
shall issue a brief written order at the end of the period
11 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2477
requesting the Cable Operator to keep accurate account of all
amounts received by reason of the proposed rate increase and on
whose behalf the amounts are paid.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 90 or
150 days after submission if no action within additional time periods, see 47 CFR
§76.933(c).
D. Public hearing. During an extended review period and
before taking action on the requested rate increase, the City
Council shall hold at least one public hearing at which interested
persons may express their views and record objections.
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
E. Objections. An interested person who wishes to make an
objection to the proposed rate increase may request the Council
Secretary to record the objection during the public hearing or may
submit the objection in writing anytime before the decision
resolution is adopted. In order for an objection to be made part
of the record, the objector shall provide the Council Secretary
with the objector's name and address.
Cross References
Participation of interested parties, see 47 CFR §76.935.
Commission review of franchising authority decisions on rates for the basic service tier and
associated equipment, any participant at the franchising authority Level in a rate
making proceeding may file an appeal, see 47 CFR §76.944(b).
F. Delayed determination. If the City Council is unable to
make a final determination concerning a requested rate increase
within the extended time period, the Cable Operator may put the
increase into effect, subject to subsequent refund if the City
Council later issues a decision disapproving any portion of the
increase.
Cross References
Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs, rates effective 90 or
150 days after submission if no action within additional time periods, see 47 CFR
§76.933(c).
G. Price Cap analysis. If a Cable Operator presents its
request for a rate increase as being in compliance with the FCC's
Price Cap, the City Council shall review the rate using the Price
Cap analysis in accordance with the standard form authorized by the
12 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2478
FCC. Based on the City Council's findings, Basic Cable Service
Rates shall be established as follows:
Cross References
subsequent permitted per channel charge, price cap adjustments, see 47 CFR §76.922(c)(2).
Price cap requirements, see CFR §76.922(d).
1. If the proposed Basic Cable Service Rate increase is
within the Price Cap established by the FCC, the proposed rates
shall become the new Basic Cable Service Rates.
2. If the proposed Basic Cable Service Rate increase exceeds
the Price Cap established by the FCC, the City Council shall
disapprove the proposed rate increase and order a Basic Cable
Service Rate that is in compliance with the Price Cap.
Cross References
Rate prescription, franchising authority to order, see 47 CFR §76.941.
H. Cost -of- Service Showings. If a Cable Operator submits a
Cost -of- Service Showing in an attempt to justify a rate increase
above the Price Cap, the City Council shall review the submission
pursuant the FCC standards for Cost -of- Service review. The City
Council may approve a rate increase above the Price Cap if the
Cable Operator makes the necessary showing; however, a
Cost -of- Service determination resulting in a rate below the Price
Cap or below the Cable Operator's then current Basic Cable Service
Rate shall prescribe the Cable Operator's new rate.
Cross References
subsequent permitted per channel charge, cost -of- service showing, see 47 CFR §76.922(c)(1).
Rate prescription, franchising authority to order, see 47 CFR §76.941.
I. Decision. The City Council's decision concerning the
requested rate increase, shall be adopted by formal resolution. If
a rate increase proposed by a Cable Operator is disapproved in
whole or in part, or if objections were made by other parties to
the proposed rate increase, the resolution shall state the reasons
for the decision. Objections may be made at the public hearing by
13 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2479
a person requesting the Council Secretary record the objection or
may be submitted in writing at anytime before the decision
resolution is adopted.
Cross References
Written decision, when a franchising authority must issue, see 47 CFR §76.936.
J. Refunds.
1. The City Council may order refunds of subscribers' Basic
Cable Service Rate payments, with interest, if:
a. The City Council was unable to make a decision within the
extended time period as described in subsection C. above; and
b. The Cable Operator implemented the rate increase at the
end of the extended review period; and
C. The City Council determines that the rate increase as
submitted exceeds the applicable Price Cap or that the Cable
Operator failed to justify the rate increase by a
Cost -of- Service Showing, and the City Council disapproves any
portion of the rate increase.
2. The method for paying any refund and the interest rate
shall be in accordance with FCC regulations as directed in the City
Council's decision resolution.
Cross References
Refunds, if previously paid rates determined to be excessive, see 47 CFR §76.942.
K. Appeal. The City Council's decision concerning Basic
Cable Service Rates may be appealed to the FCC in accordance with
applicable federal regulations.
Cross References
Commission review of franchising authority decisions on rates for the basic service tier and
associated equipment, any participant at the franchising authority level in a rate
making proceeding may file an appeal, see 47 CFR §76.944.
SECTION 1004. CABLE OPERATOR INFORMATION
A. city may require.
1. In those cases when a Cable Operator has submitted
initial rates or proposed an increase that exceeds the Reasonable
Rate Standard, the City Council may require the Cable Operator to
produce information, in addition to that submitted, including
14 CAOLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2480
proprietary information, if needed to make a rate determination.
In these cases, a Cable Operator may request the information be
kept confidential in accordance with this Section.
Cross References
Proprietary information, franchising authority may require if procedures analogous to those
provided in §0.459 are applied, see 47 CFR §76.938.
See 47 CFR §0.459.
2. In cases where initial or proposed rates comply with the
Reasonable Rate Standard, the City Council may request additional
information only in order to document that the Cable Operator's
rates are in accord with the Reasonable Rate Standard.
B. Request for confidentiality.
1. A Cable Operator submitting information to the City
Council may request in writing that the information not be made
routinely available for public inspection. A copy of the request
shall be attached to and cover all of the information and all
copies of the information to which it applies.
2. If feasible, the information to which the request applies
shall be physically separated from any information to which the
request does not apply. If this is not feasible, the portion of
the information to which the request applies shall be identified.
3. Each request shall contain a statement of the reasons for
withholding inspection and a statement of the facts upon which
those reasons are based.
4. Informal requests which do not comply with the
requirements of this subsection, shall not be considered.
C. City council action. Requests which comply with the
requirements of subsection B. shall be acted upon by the City
Council. The City Council shall grant the request if the Cable
Operator presents, by a preponderance of the evidence, a case for
nondisclosure consistent with applicable federal regulations. If
the request is granted, the ruling shall be placed in a public file
in lieu of the information withheld from public inspection. If the
Cable Operator does not establish a case for nondisclosure and the
City Council denies the request, the City Council shall take one of
the following actions:
15 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2481
1. If the information has been submitted voluntarily without
any direction from the City, the Cable Operator may request that
the City return the information without considering it.
Ordinarily, the City will comply with such a request; however, when
the public interest so requires, the information shall be made
available for public inspection.
2. If the information was required to be submitted by the
City Council, the information shall be made available for public
inspection.
D. Appeal. If the City Council denies the request for
confidentiality, the Cable Operator may seek review of that
decision from the FCC within five working days of the City
Council's decision, and the release of the information shall be
stayed pending review.
SECTION 1005. AUTOMATIC RATE ADJUSTMENTS
A. Annual inflation adjustment. In accordance with FCC
regulations, the Cable Operator may adjust its capped base per
Channel rate for the Basic Cable Service Tier annually by the final
Gross National Product Price Index.
Cross References
Price cap requirements, inflation adjustments, 47 CFR §76.922(d)(1).
B. Other external costs.
1. FCC regulations allow the Cable Operator to increase its
Basic Cable Service Rates automatically to reflect certain external
cost factors to the extent that the increase in cost of those
factors exceeds the Gross National Product Price Index. These
factors include retransmission consent fees, programming costs,
state and local taxes applicable to the provision of cable
television service, and costs of permit or franchise requirements.
The total cost of an increase in a permit or franchise fee may be
automatically added to the base per Channel rate, without regard to
its relation to the Gross National Product Price Index.
Cross References
Price cap requirements, external costs, 47 CFR §76.922(d)(2).
2. For all categories of external costs other than
retransmission consent and franchise fees, the starting date for
measuring changes in external costs for which the basic service per
Channel rate may be adjusted shall be the date on which the Basic
Cable Service Tier becomes subject to regulation or February 28,
16 CA6LERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2482
1994, whichever occurs first. The permitted per channel charge may
not be adjusted for costs of retransmission consent fees or changes
in those fees incurred before October 6, 1994.
Cross References
Price cap requirements, external costs, effective date of adjustments, see 47 CFR
§76.922(d)(2)(iii) & (iv).
C. Notification and review. The Cable Operator shall notify
the City at least thirty (30) days in advance of a rate increase
based on automatic adjustment items. The City shall review the
increase to determine whether the item or items qualify as
automatic adjustments. If the City makes no objection within
thirty (30) days of receiving notice of the increase, the increase
may go into effect.
Cross References
Advance written notification of rate increases to franchising authority, see 47 CFR §76.964.
SECTION 1006. ENFORCEMENT
A. Refunds. The City may order the Cable Operator to refund
to subscribers a portion of previously paid rates under the
following circumstances:
1. A portion of the previously paid rates have been
determined to be in excess of the permitted tier charge or above
the actual cost of equipment; or
2. The Cable Operator has failed to comply with a valid rate
order issued by the City.
Cross References
Refunds, if previously paid rates determined to be excessive, see 47 CFR §76.942.
B. Fines. If the Cable Operator fails to comply with a rate
decision or refund order, the Cable Operator shall be subject to a
fine of $200 for each day the Cable Operator fails to comply.
Cross References
Fines, franchising authority to impose fines, 47 CFR §76.943.
17 CABLERAT.ANN 010994 13:20
5610 2483
Section 2. SEVERABILILTY CLAUSE. If any section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance or any part thereof is for any
reason found to be invalid by a court of competetent jurisdiction,
such decision shall not affect the validitiy of the remainder of
this ordinance or any part thereof.
Section 3. EMERGENCY CLAUSE. An emergency is hereby declared
to exist for the preservation of the public peace, health and
safety, by reason whereof this ordinance shall be effective
immediately from and after its passage, approval and publication.
PASSED AND APPROVED with the emergency clause ruled upon and
appr ed separately by the Council, this 18th day of
January, 1994.
CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
By: Bob Randolph, Mayor
ATTEST: Sherry Bishop, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ronald D Cates, City Attorney
5610 2484
Affidavift Of Publication
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, TULSA COUNTY, ss:
Bill R. Retherford, of lawful age, being duly sworn
and authorized, says that he is the Publisher of the
OWASSO REPORTER a weekly
newspaper Printed in the city of OWASSO_
Tulsa County, Oklahoma, a newspaper qualified to
publish legal notices, advertisements and Publications
as provided in Section :196 of Title 25, Oklahoma
Statutes 1971. and 1933 as amended, arid 'thereafter,
and complies with all other requirements of the laws
of Oklahoma with reference to legal Publications.
That said notice, a trine copy of which is attached
hereto, was published in the regular edition of' said
newspaper during the period and time of publication
and not in a supplement, on 4:he following dates:
JANUARY
Subscribed and sworn to before m is 27th
day of January 199 4
Notary Public
My Commission expires;.._ March 20, 199
PUBLISHER'S FEE $33.00
Published in the Owasso Reporter, Owasso, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, Jan-
uary 27, 1894.
CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
Ordinance No. 477
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART 17, UTILITIES, OF THE CODE
OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, BY
ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 4, SECTIONS 1000 THROUGH 1ow,
RELATED TO REGULATION OF BASIC CABLE TELEVISION SER-
VICE RATES WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
OWASSO; DEFINING CERTAIN TERMS; ESTABLISHING PROCE-
DURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INITIAL REVIEW OF
BASIC CABLE SERVICE RATES; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES
FOR CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE OPERATORS TO REQUEST AN
INCREASE IN BASIC CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE RATES; PRO-
VIDING CERTAIN PROTECTIONS FOR PROPRIETARY INFORMA-
TION PRODUCED BY A CABLE TELEVISION OPERATOR TO THE
CITY; PROVIDING FOR AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
BASIC CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE RATES, IN ACCORDANCE
WITH FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REGULATIONS;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGEN-
CY.
PASSED AND APPROVED with the emergency clause ruled upon and
approved separately by the Council, this 18th day of January, 1994.
(SEAL) CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
By: IsI Bob Randolph
Bob Randolph, Mayor
ATTEST-
/s/ Sherry Bishop
Sherry Bishop, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM -
Is/ Ronald D. Cates
Ronald D. Cates, City Attorney
MEMORANDUM
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: RODNEY J RAY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT ORDINANCE #477 REGULATING CABLE TELEVISION
DATE: January 13, 1994
BACKGROUND
On August 17, 1993, the City Council authorized the staff to file the necessary documents
declaring the City's intent to regulate cable telebision activities as provided for by the "cable
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992". Additionally, on that same date
the Mayor was authorized to execute a notice to Owasso's cable provider (TCI Cable) relating
to that intended regulation. Those actions by the staff and Mayor have been implemented,
thereby meeting the first steps required by the FCC if a city is to be empowered to regulate
cable rates.
Since that time, the staff has concentrated on a review of the FCC rules that must be followed
in order to implement the actual regulation. Additionally, a review of the methods of that
regulation was undertaken by the staff, working with the other area cities. Those reviews and
research by mr. cates indicated that an ordinance was the best method for developing a
regulation process. Fort the past several months Mr Cates has worked as the City's coordinator
for these activities and has now completed an ordinance that establishes a well defined regulation
process for cable television. Adoption of this ordinance is critical to our ability to implement
cable television regulation. If passed, Ordinance #477 would allow the city to begin the process
of regulating cable television rates in the "basic tier" of service.
Mr Cates has provided a more detailed explanation of the ordinance in a memorandum attached
for your review. If you have questions after reviewing that memorandum and the attached
ordinance, please call Mr Cates (582-7447) or me. Please note that the staff has requsted the
attachment of an "Emergency Clause" to Ordinance #477. This request is due to a requirement
that TCI be notified prior to January 31, 1994 that a process is in place and regulation of their
service will be implemented. Also, it should be noted that in addition to limited rate regulation,
the ordinance provides for the establishement of "service standards". It is the staff opinion that
this area of regulation could prove to be the most important at this time.
MEMORANDUM
Ordinance #477
January 13, 1994
Page 2
The staff recommends Council approval of Ordinance #477 and the attachment of an emergency
clause in a separate action.
ATTACHMENTS
1, Memorandum dated January 12, 1994 from Mr Cates
2, Ordinance #477
3, Memorandum dated August 12, 1993 from City Manager
4, Memorandum dated August 6, 1993 from Mr Cates
S, better dated August 18, 1993 from Mayor Randolph to TCI
MEMO
TO: The Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council and
Rodney J. Ray, City Manager
FROM: Ronald D. Cates, City Attorney
RE: Owasso Basic Cable Television Service Rate Regulation
Ordinance
DATE: January 12, 1994
Presented for the Council's consideration is a proposed Basic
Cable Television Service Rate Regulation Ordinance. As you will
recall, under the Cable Television and Consumer Protection Act of
1992, as amended, as well as Federal Communication Commission
Regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, a regulating
municipality, obtaining certification for rate regulation, is
required wiKhin 120 days of such certification. to adopt rate
regulation procedures. The submitted Owasso Basic Television
Service Rate Regulation Ordinance accomplishes such task.
Essentially, the proposed ordinance provides for the
following, to-wit:
1) Definitions;
2) initial Review of basic cable service rates;
3) Review of requests for increase in basic cable service
rates;
4) Cable operator information;
5) Automatic Rate Adjustments; and,
6) Enforcement.
Contained within the above outlined categories are provisions for
notification to the cable operator, submission by the cable
operator to the City Council for approval of a requested rate,
provisions for public hearing, provisions for Council consideration
and determination as well as provisions for cable operator appeal
to the Federal Communications Commission. These provisions are
applicable both to the initial basic cable service rate as well as
any subsequent rate adjustments,
The proposed ordinance contains an emergency clause seeking
tt,s efyoctiveness immediately upon adoption of such by the
Council. The emergency clause adoption is requested due to the
fact it is necessary that this ordinance be adopted prior to the
31st day of January, 1994. 1 apologize for the necessary expedited
consideration of tho ordinance; however, municipal attorneys in
the Tulsa metropolitan area had determined that in order to avoid
incurrence of thousands of dollars of costs on the part of our
clients in creation of a cable rate regulation ordinance, it would
be better to await the creation of a prototype cable rate
regulation ordinance by the National Institute of Municipal
Officers (NIMLO) which could then be readily utilized by the rate
regulating municipalities. The proposed ordinance is such
prototype ordinance which, but for a few minor local variations,
has heretofore been adopted by the City of Tulsa, Oklahoma. It is
also submitted that other rate regulating municipalities within the
metropolitan area are being presented with this ordinance by the
respective local's City Attorney with a recommendation for adoption
of same.
I will conclude by stating that it has previously been
determined through meetings held with City Managers as well as City
Attorneys within the metropolitan area through INCOG that
uniformity of cable rate regulations and service regulations is a
desired goal. Likewise, it is submitted that uniformity of
procedures for cable rate regulations would be advantageous to the
municipality as well as the cable provider. Accordingly, it is my
recommendation that the proposed Owasso Basic Cabl.e Television
Service Rate Regulation Ordinance be adopted with the emergency
clause thereon approved.
owgen94.mco 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF OWASSO
FROM: RODNEY J RAY
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF CABLE
TELEVISION REGULATION
DATE: August 12, 1993
BACKGROUND:
Several months ago I requested that our attorney undertake to become familiar with, and provide
staff direction, for any actions the City may wish to take utilizing the provisions of the Cable
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. Pursuant to that request, Mr
Cates has attended training sessions and conducted research relative to that subject.
Based upon his research, Mr Cates has presented the attached memorandum wherein he
recommends certain actions be taken by the Council in order to preserve its rights to regulate
cable television. At his request, and after reviewing his findings, I listed an agenda item for
your consideration that, if approved, would start the process of re- regulating some of the cable
services. Mr Cates' memorandum is attached for your review and clearly outlines the issues
relevant to the discussion of regulation. I concur with both the findings, conclusions,
observations and recommendation of Mr Cates and urge the Council to carefully review the
memorandum.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Council declare its intent to provide regulation of cable television
as provided by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, and that
the Mayor be authorized to execute FCC Form 328; and that the Mayor be authorized to execute
a notice to cable operator under FCC rules on customer standards.
ATTACHMENT:
1. Memorandum from Mr Cates dated August 6, 1993
918 -582 -7447
RONALD D. CATES
Attorney at Law
Suite 680, ParkCentre
525 South Main
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103
MEMORANDUM
TO: Rodney J. Ray, City Manager
FROM: Ronald D. Cates, City Attorneys
DATE: August 6, 1993
FAX 918 -582 -0166
RE: Municipal Regulation and Ownership of Cable Television
On the 5th day of August, 1993, I attended and completed a
training seminar relating to Municipil Regulation and Ownership of
Cable Television sponsored by the Oklahoma Municipal League. In
that respect I enclose herewith a copy of the provided
certification of such attendance. As you are aware, I am sure, the
seminar predominately dealt with the re- regulation of the cable
television industry by virtue of the enactment of the Cable
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 wherein,
in part, cities and counties were reinvested with the ability
(emphasis our own) to regulate basic rates of their local cable
franchisee as well as some aspects of the services provided by such
franchisee. I specifically note "ability" in the foregoing due to
the fact that the actual determination to re -enter the field of
regulation of cable television is not automatic but instead,
requires affirmative action be taken on the part of the local cable
franchise authority to exercise the jurisdiction authorized by the
Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992.
By way of background on October 5, 1992, Congress enacted the
Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992,
Public Law Number 102 -385, Sections 3,9 & 14, 106 Statutes 1460
(1992.)(Cable Act of 1992) . In adoption of the Cable Act of 1992,
numerous Congressional findings were set forth providing the
legitimacy and necessity for the legislation. Insofar as the
municipality is concerned, I feel the most pertinent Congressional
findings are the following, to -wit:
(a) Findings. - The Congress finds and declares the
following: (1) Pursuant to the Cable Communications
Policy Act of 1984, rates for cable television services
have been deregulated in approximately 97 percent of all
franchises since December 29, 1986. Since rate
deregulation, monthly rates for the .lowest priced basic
cable service have increased by 40 percent or more for
28 percent of cable television subscribers. Although the
average number of basic channels has increased from about
24 to 30, average monthly rates have increased by 29
percent during the same period. The average monthly
cable rate has increased almost 3 times as much as the
Consumer Price Index since .rate deregulation.
(2) For a variety of reasons, including local
franchising requirements and the extraordinary expense of
constructing more than one cable television system to serve
a particular geographic area, most cable television
subscribers have no opportunity to select between competing
cable systems. Without the presence of another multichannel
video programming distributor, a cable system faces no local
competition. The result is undue market power for the cable
operator as compared to that of consumers and video
programmers.
(20) The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, in its
amendments to the Communications Act of 1934, limited the
regulatory authority of franchising authorities over cable
operators. Franchising authorities are finding it difficult
under the current regulatory scheme to deny renewals to cable
systems that are not adequately serving cable subscribers.
As a result of the foregoing, Congress adopted the Cable Act of
1992, which, in part, at Section 3 thereof provides for regulation
of rates and at Section 8 thereof provides for consumer protection
and customer service provisions.
I.
RATE REGULATION
As provided under the Cable Act of 1992, as well as FCC
regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, local jurisdictions may
exercise rate regulation over cable systems which are not subject
to effective competition. Expressed another way, a cable system
which is subject to effective competition is exempt from rate
regulation. A cable system which is subject to effective
competition is one of the following, to -wit:
a) An operator that serves less than thirty percent (300) of
the households in the operating territory;
b) Comparable multi - channel video service provider which
offers service to at least fifty percent (50%) of households in
franchi.se territory and fifteen percent (15 %) of households
subscribe to such service; or,
c) The franchising authority offers service to fifty percent
(50%) of the households.
Assuming that the municipality is anticipating rate regulation of
a cable system deemed by it not to be subject to effective
competition, the .Local jurisdiction, as provided under the Cable
Act of 1992, and FCC regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, is
limited to regulating basic tier rates and associated equipment.
The 1992 Cable Act divides cable services into three (3)
2
categories. Each category is subject to a different regulatory
scheme. The basic service tier must include, at a minimum, the
broadcast signals distributed by the cable operator (except
superstati.ons), along with with any public, educational, and
governmental (PEG) access channels that the local franchise
authorities requires a system operator to carry on the basic tier.
Regulation of rates for this category of service is generally the
.responsibility of state and local government. Equipment used to
receive the basic service tier is also regulated by them,
regardless of whether the equipment is also used to receive non -
basic programming.
The second category of service, called Cable Programming
Service, .includes all video programming distributed over the system
that is not on the basic service tier and for which the operator
does not charge a per channel or per program fee. This category
of service is subject to regulation by the FCC and only in response
to specific complaints regarding an operator's cable programming
service.
The third category of service includes video program for which
the operator does charge a per channel or per program fee. The
rates for this service are not subject to regulation by either
local governments or the FCC.
To assert jurisdiction over basic tier rates, and associated
equipment, the locality must (a) request_ certification from the
FCC; (b) have in place regulations consistent with FCC rules and
policies; and, (c) provide cable operators appropriate notices of
their intent to seek certification and of the effective date of the
regulatory authority. Localities may begin requesting
certifications by filing FCC Form 328 with the FCC once the FCC's
rules become effective. As of the date of this memorandum, the FCC
has accelerated it's original effective date of October 1, 1993,
to September 1, 1993. Therefore, on or after September 1, 1993,
FCC Form 328 may be filed with the Commission on behalf of the
municipality.
In the certification request, the municipality must state that
(a) it will adopt and administer rate regulations consistent with
the FCC's regulations, as well as regulations which will give
interested parties an opportunity to participate in rate cases;
(b) it has legal. authority to regulate rates; (c) it has
personnel necessary to regulate rates; and, (d) it has no reason
to believe the cable operator it seeks to regulate faces effective
competition. The certification becomes effective thirty (30) days
after the date on the return receipt or the date on the stamped
copy unless the FCC finds, after notice and reasonable opportunity
for the local authority to comment, that the franchising
authority's certification request is detective in that it does not
meet one of the four criteria. It is .important: to note in the
certification process that the FCC will presume that the cable
3
operator is not subject to effective competition based upon the
f.ranchi. sing authorities filing of certification with the FCC.
Further, the FCC will not notify the franchising authority that
it's certification has become effective. Accordingly, absent a
challenge to local certification, thirty (30) days from the date
on the return receipt, the locality can assume it's certification
as being approved unless otherwise advised.
II
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
Under the provisions of Section 8 of the Cable Act of 1992,
a franchising authority may establish and enforce customer service
requirements of the cable operator and construction schedules and
other construction related requirements, including construction
related performance requirements of 'the cable operator. Section
8 of the Cable Act of 1992 directs that the Commission shall,
within 180 days of enactment of the Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992 establish standards by which
cable operators may fulfill their customer service requirements.
Such standards must include, at a minimum, requirements governing
cable system officer hours and telephone availability,
installations, outages and service calls and communications between
the cable operator and subscriber (including standards governing
bills and refunds). The FCC, to date has promulgated customer
service standards pertaining to the following, to -wit: (1)
Service unbundling, (2) billing itemization, (3) negative billing
prohibited, (4) tier buy through prohibition, (5) uniform rate
structure, (6) hours of operation and telephone availability, (7)
speed of service requirements, (8) appointment windows, (9) notice
of service and rate changes, annual notice, (10) billing and
refunds. Further, the FCC has stated that a local franchising
authority may enforce the provisions of .items six through ten by
giving notice to the cable provider not less than ninety (90) days
prior to the intended date of enforcement. It is important to
note, at this juncture, that Section 8 of the Cable Act of 1992
specifically states that "nothing in this section shall be
construed to preclude a franchising authority and a cable operator
from agreeing to customer service requirements that exceed the
standards established by the Commission. Further, nothing in the
Act should be construed to prevent the establishment or enforcement
of any municipal law or regulation... concerning customer service
that imposes customer service requirements that exceed the
standards set by the Commission or that addresses matters not
addressed by the standards set by the Commission under this
.`section ". Accordingly, the local franchising authority, ninety
(90) days subsequent to written notification of intent to regulate,
may enforce the FCC customer service standards as well as may
impose customer service standards in addition thereto which are not
specifically preempted by federal. law.
4
III.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the foregoing, it is my recommendation that the
matter be submitted to the City Council of the City of Owasso,
Oklahoma, for it's determination as to whether or not it seeks to
re -enter the field of rate and service regulation of the cable
provider. In addition to the personnel and procedural
considerations imposed upon the municipality to reinvest itself
with regulatory authority, as outlined above, I submit as other
necessary considerations in the decision making process, the
following, to -wit:
l.) What will the citizens gain and lose by local regulations;
2) What will the franchisee gain or lose with local
regulations;
3) Since cable television is a monopolistic enterprise, is
regulation expected by the public just like other utilities; and,
4) If the municipality defers regulation to the FCC, what
will be the impact locally? Will the FCC address local concerns?
In providing assistance to the City Council in analyzing the
foregoing considerations I submit the following. Initially, albeit
to a limited extent by virtue of the deregulation that occurred
under the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, the
municipality, by virtue of it's franchising authority, is in the
cable television regulation business. Additionally, a decision to
avail itself of the opportunities provided by the Cable Act of 1992
is viewed as an opportunity for the locality, on behalf of it's
citizens, to gain greater input and control into basic tier rate
regulation as well as customer service standards. In conjunction
with the recognition that the citizens via the municipality, gain
input and control into the basic service tier rates should also be
the recognition that regulation of such basic service tier likewise
places the municipality in a position whereby it will be afforded
information, which it would not otherwise receive, to enable the
municipality to determine whether or not it should lodge a
complaint with the FCC in the form of a Cable Programming Service
Rate Complaint, on the tier exclusively regulated by the FCC.
Insofar as any anticipated franchisee gain or loss by virtue
of local regulation, I submit that by recognition of the
Congressional findings above set forth in part, the loss will be
that of an unfettered, monopolistic, enterprise that in large part
for approximately nine (9) years has operated without any effective
regulation. Notwithstanding such loss, I am of the opinion that
the franchisee will gain through local regulation by such
regulation creating a vehicle whereby the cable. operator, as
franchisee, will be compelled to be more sensitive to the attitudes
and needs on the part of it's customers. It is opined that such,
although presenting an opportunity for skirmishes, nevertheless,
has the ultimate potential of establishing understanding and
acceptance which fosters provider - subscriber satisfaction.
It is submitted that due to the monopolistic nature of cable
television, a legitimate expectation of regulation is possessed on
the part of the public. I would submit that evidence of the
existence of such expectation already exists by virtue of the input
the municipality has received during the cable franchise renewal
process. I submit that the citizenry of Owasso, Oklahoma; has in
the past, expressed surprise over the absence of regulatory
authority arising by virtue of the Cable Communications Policy Act
of 1984, due to the citizenry's perceived regulatory power pursuant
to the franchising authority possessed under the Constitution of
the State of Oklahoma.
I am of the opinion that if the City of Owasso, Oklahoma,
defers regulation to the FCC, the impact locally will be
inattentiveness to local concerns. This position is predicated
foremost by the fact that the FCC lobbied against passage of the
Cable Act of 1992. Additionally, the FCC, by virtue of requested
comments during proposed rule making has evidenced an attitude of
encouragement of local regulation. It has been opined that
although the Clinton administration may encourage a more consumer
oriented approach the FCC, in recent years, probably due to the
Reagan -Bush era of deregulation of private enterprise, has been
known more for attempting to deregulate than regulate industry.
Finally, in a general sense, recognition of the fact that the FCC
is not only geographically, but most likely attitudnally, far
removed from the concerns of the citizens of the City of Owasso,
Oklahoma, it is submitted that deferment to the FCC, will in all
likelihood result in a continuation of "business as usual ".
Based upon the foregoing I submit that a recommendation to the
City Council of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma, to avail itself of
the regulatory powers arising by virtue of the Cable Television
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 should be made.
In conjunction therewith, authorization should be sought from the
Council to enable the Mayor to execute FCC Form 328 - Certification
of Franchising Authority to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates and
Initial Finding of Lack of Effective Competition. Finally,
author.izat.ion should be sought from the City Council authorizing
the Mayor to execute the Notice to Cable Operator under FCC rules
on customer service standards. For your convenience, I have
prepared such documents and enclose them herewith.
If the City Council of the City of Owasso, Oklahoma,
det.ermirnes to avail itself of the regulatory abilities provided by
the Cable Act: of 1992, in addition to the foregoing, I recommend
that we .immediately embark upon the establishment, for Council
approval, of regulations with respect to rate regulation
3
proceedings as well as basic cable service that are consistent with
the regulations adopted by the FCC, or as may be authorized by
Section 8 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and
Competition Act of 1992.
I trust the foregoing meets with your needs at this time.
Should you have any questions or comments concerning the foregoing,
please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience.
RDC /nhc
owgen93.mc:t
7
207 SOUTH CEDAR
PHONE 272 -2251
City of Owasso
August
Mr. Rick Comfort
General Manager
TCI Cablevision
P.O. Box 470800
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74147 -0800
(via certified mail)
Dear Mr. Comfort:
1993
OWASSO, OKLAHOMA
74055
On April 7, 1993, the Federal Communications Commission
released a Report and Order adopting a new rule (47 C.F.R. Section
76.309) implementing Section 8 of the Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992; that section governs the
establishment, implementation and enforcement of customer service
standards for cable operators nationwide. A copy of the new rule
is enclosed.
Paragraph (c) of the new rule establishes federal customer
service standards ( "federal standards "). Paragraph (a) of the new
rule provides that a franchising authority may enforce the federal
standards, but in order to do so, the franchising authority must
provide affected cable operators 90 days' written notice of it's
intent to enforce the standards. This letter constitutes the City
of Owasso's notice of its intent to enforce the federal standards.
The City intends to begin enforcing the federal standards on
November.. 11, 1993.
Paragraph (b) of the new rule reserves to franchising
authorities, among other things, rights to establish and /or enforce
state and local customer service requirements that exceed or are
not cove.red by the federal standards. The City of Owasso,
Oklahoma, reserves and intends to exercise all rights reserved to
franchising authorities.
Sincerely,
Bob Randolph
Mayor of the City of Owasso
nhc
ow225.ntc